Posted by Wayne Martin
a resident of Fairmeadow
on Dec 27, 2013 at 3:55 pm

> Under its hydroelectric contracts, Palo Alto pays the same amount of
> money for that power no matter how much the city gets,

So .. if the output of the hydro plants were to be reduced to zero--then we would have to be paying millions for nothing? How are the ratepayers actually benefitted by such an arrangement?

So--$5M sounds like a lot of money, but how much is it compared to the total electrical purchases needed to power the city? Keep in mind that commercial use of electricity has historically been over 80%--so the bulk of any cost overruns will be absorbed by the commercial accounts, and 15%-20% absorbed by the residents. Given this use distribution, what is the likely cost increase for a 600 to 900 KWH residential user?

That does beg the question of how the hydroelectric contracts are worded. There must be some guaranteed minimum power/energy delivery below which a pro-rated cost reduction is effected. Seems we should have learned something from the good old Enron days.

The 21.9 cents per kWh San Francisco households paid for electricity in November 2013 was 68.5 percent more than the nationwide average of 13.0 cents per kWh. Last November, electricity costs were 63.0 percent higher in San Francisco compared to the nation. In each of the past five years, prices paid
by San Francisco area consumers for electricity exceeded the U.S. average by at least 58 percent in the month of November.
----

Given the high levels of regulation that PG&E is beset with, it might be interesting if the PUC were to provide some insight as to why they have forced the cost of electricity to be so high for PG&E customers.

Doubtless PG&E has some input into the price-point determinations, but still--a 70% higher price is not readily understandable.

BTW--Palo Alto electricity prices are not really any different in the 300-600 KWH use range, than the national average.

Posted by NIMBY
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Dec 30, 2013 at 2:03 am

Hey Gus,

We are dealing with a state water shortage, not a city water shortage. "Limiting population growth in our city" is not a comprehensive solution. I suggest building the Great Wall of California to keep people from entering via Oregon, Nevada, Arizona, or Mexico. We should also kick out everybody not born in California. Once we wall off our state we won't have to worry about the traffic generated by newcomers and we can party like it's 1960.

Posted by boscoli
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Dec 30, 2013 at 7:30 am

@NIMBY, I know that your post was sarcastic, but there are practical and smart ways of limiting population growth. Don't temper with existing zoning standards to allow larger population density (no more Maybell project -like schemes), don't allow multi families to live in one household, something that's increasingly happening in Palo Alto.

Posted by Seeds of Change
a resident of Monroe Park
on Dec 30, 2013 at 9:56 am

Whatever happened to seeding the clouds? There was a blurb on CNN recently about how cloud-seeding has become a lot more effective in the last twenty years.

BTW, the basement issue is an important one. I have two neighbors who have large basements, and the water pumps run ten months our of twelve for the last fifteen years! What a waste! Larry P age's new house between Bryant and Waverley also drains water from somewhere several months of the years, and it is sitting on a known aquifer.

A real estate agent recently told me that people add basements because that is square footage that cannot be taxed.

Posted by Dry Winter
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Dec 31, 2013 at 8:40 am

"CPAU electric power sources include the Calaveras hydroelectric project, the Western Area Power Administration (Western) hydroelectricontract, long-term power purchase agreements with solar, wind and landfill gas facilities and other short-term contracts from the wholesale market. Western power comes from two sources, the Central Valley Project hydroelectric facilities and from wholesale power contracts with various suppliers in California and the Northwest United States."

Posted by SteveU
a resident of Barron Park
on Dec 31, 2013 at 9:08 amSteveU is a registered user.

We need a utilities 'Shortage Tax' so California can maintain its lead in the Highest rates in the USA, race.

At some point, spending $3500 to replace my $500 tank type water heater with a Tankless (and gas line size upgrade) will actually make economic sense.

At some point, spending $50K to install PV panels on my roof (will need a $$$ structural upgrade to support them)will actually break even before they begin to fail.

We need a LOT more rate increases and users taxes so these highly touted Green retrofit programs make financial sense. Every shortage has resulted in a Rate increase that never completely went away at the shortage end. Another perfect excuse for a rate increase. Go City Hall

Posted by Jane Ratchye
a resident of Downtown North
on Dec 31, 2013 at 11:20 am

John,
Yes, Calaveras Dam in the East Bay is part of the San Francisco's regional water supply system ("Hetch Hetchy" system) which is the source of Palo Alto's potable water supplies. It is indeed a water storage dam with no electric power generated.

The City of Palo Alto is part owner of the Calaveras Hydroelectric Project on the North Fork of the Stanislaus River in Calaveras County (see: Web Link).

Wayne,
You asked to put the $5 million cost in context. The City's FY 2014 budget for the Electric Fund is $138.4 million (see: Web Link) so $5.46 million is about 4% of the total budget. The total budget for energy supplies purchased by the City is $74.5 million plus $9.1 million for debt service on the Calaveras Hydroelectric Project so $5.46 million is about 6.5% of the FY 2014 budget for energy supplies.

Don't miss out on the discussion!Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Email:

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online.
Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information
and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.